Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Instruction counts
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 10:00:32 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <a18cea1b8c724722fda01a2246139dbb@www.novabbs.org>
References: <v9f7b9$3qj3c$1@dont-email.me> <v9gl1b$30as$7@dont-email.me> <2024Aug14.111001@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <c6653232ff022a7f991a061bfbf46ec3@www.novabbs.org> <2024Aug15.123928@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <1f9360728a7b19bcbf3660565adfa2f5@www.novabbs.org> <2024Aug16.072330@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2763217"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="65wTazMNTleAJDh/pRqmKE7ADni/0wesT78+pyiDW8A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: ac58ceb75ea22753186dae54d967fed894c3dce8
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$2FKSykBhRHgW0qb3Yo.bZOALKVQTSBaFXb77oQuS4NMldWfg6GYj6
Bytes: 2157
Lines: 36

On Fri, 16 Aug 2024 5:23:30 +0000, Anton Ertl wrote:

> mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) writes:
>>And RISC-V ends up with over 448 instructions
>
> How do you count this?  Looking at chapter 19 of
> https://riscv.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/riscv-spec-v2.2.pdf, I
> count for RV64G:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISC-V
>
>  47 RV32I
>  15 RV64I additional instructions
>   8 RV32M
>   5 RV64M additional instructions
>  11 RV32A
>  11 RV64A additional instructions
>  26 RV32F
>   4 RV64F additional instructions
>  26 RV32D
>   6 RV64D additional instructions
   43     B
   40     C
  187     V
   43     Zk
   15     H
> ---------------------------------
> 159 RV64G
  492
>
>>whereas My 66000 has but 65.
>
> There are also One-instruction set computer designs
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-instruction_set_computer>, and by
> that metric they are the best, no?

Everything should be as simple as possible, but no simpler. A.E.